Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “organizational communication”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

142 records · Page 8
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2022

Using Systems Theoretic Process Analysis and Causal Analysis to Map and Manage Organizational Information to Enable Digitalization and Information Automation

The overarching goal of this Light Water Reactor Sustainability Program–supported research and development project is to provide planning tools and comprehensive guidance to utilities considering or undertaking full nuclear plant modernization. The results of this research will provide the nuclear industry with a comprehensive and usable solution, including guidance, lessons learned, methods, and planning tools. This research is currently working to provide guidance on digitalization and information automation to enable the evolution of data to information, insight, and action—thereby allowing utilities to operate safely and cost-competitively with all other electrical generation sources. Light Water Reactor Sustainability Program researchers have also recently started investigating how human and technology integration principles, information automation, and digitalization enable data evolution. These researchers are currently in the process of validating the use of System-Theoretic Process Analysis to define high-level safety constraints in the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s problem identification and resolution process (i.e., a plant compliance information gathering activity). The next step in this research, which is described in the following sections of this report, is to map out data evolution in a use case to identify inefficiencies in another aspect of plant compliance information gathering and communication activities—event investigations and root cause analyses.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
NASA NTRS1993

Interoperability through standardization: Electronic mail, and X Window systems

Since the introduction of computing machines, there has been continual advances in computer and communication technologies and approaching limits. The user interface has evolved from a row of switches, character based interface using teletype terminals and then video terminals, to present day graphical user interface. It is expected that next significant advances will come in the availability of services, such as electronic mail and directory services, as the standards for applications are developed and in the 'easy to use' interfaces, such as Graphical User Interface for example Window and X Window, which are being standardized. Various proprietary electronic mail (email) systems are in use within organizations at each center of NASA. Each system provides email services to users within an organization, however the support for email services across organizations and across centers exists at centers to a varying degree and is often easy to use. A recent NASA email initiative is intended 'to provide a simple way to send email across organizational boundaries without disruption of installed base.' The initiative calls for integration of existing organizational email systems through gateways connected by a message switch, supporting X.400 and SMTP protocols, to create a NASA wide email system and for implementation of NASA wide email directory services based on OSI standard X.500. A brief overview of MSFC efforts as a part of this initiative are described. Window based graphical user interfaces make computers easy to use. X window protocol has been developed at Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1984/1985 to provide uniform window based interface in a distributed computing environment with heterogenous computers. It has since become a standard supported by a number of major manufacturers. Z Windows systems, terminals and workstations, and X Window applications are becoming available. However impact of its use in the Local Area Network environment on the network traffic are not well understood. It is expected that the use of X Windows systems will increase at MSFC especially for Unix based systems. An overview of X Window protocol is presented and its impact on the network traffic is examined. It is proposed that an analytical model of X Window systems in the network environment be developed and validated through the use of measurements to generate application and user profiles.

Amin, Ashok T.↗
NASA NTRS1994

Upward appraisal as a means for improving supervisory performance and promoting process improvement, with long-term implications for organizational change

This study represents the implementation phase of an organizational development project which was initiated last year in the Management Support Division (MSD) at Langley Research Center to diagnose organizational functioning. As a result of MSD survey data from last year's effort, a Quality Action Team was created to address the responses compiled from the MSD Organizational Assessment Questionnaire and Follow-Up Questionnaire. The team was officially named the MSD Employee Relations Improvement Team (MERIT). MERIT's goal was to analyze major concerns generated by the questionnaires and to present feasible solutions to management which would improve supervisory performance, promote process improvement; and ultimately, lead to a better organization. The team met weekly and was very disciplined in following guidelines needed to ensure a fully functioning team. Several TQM tools were used during the team process, including brainstorming and the cause and effect diagram. One of the products produced by MERIT was a 'report card', more formally known as an upward appraisal system, to evaluate supervisory performance in the division office, its three branches, and in teams. Major areas of emphasis on the 47 item report card were those identified by employees through the previously administered questionnaires as needing to be improved; specifically, training, recognition, teamwork, supervision and leadership, and communication. MERIT created an enlarged and modified version of the report card which enabled scores for each individual supervisor to be recorded on a separate form, along with summary results and employee comments. Report card results have been compiled and fed back to the Division Chief and Assistant Division Chief. These individuals will in turn, feed the results back to the remaining supervisors and the team leaders. Although results differ among supervisors, some similarities exist. Communication generally appears to be adequate, which represents an improvement over last year. In contrast, recognition and teamwork are the two major areas where improvement in supervisory performance seems to be most needed. The initial report card results will serve as a baseline against which future performance ratings will be compared. Once supervisors have been presented with their data and given an opportunity to analyze and discus the results, they will be assisted in developing an action plan for improving their performance and work processes. They will be provided with ongoing support from management in following through with the action plan.

Siegfeldt, Denise V.↗
NASA NTRS2023

Information and Best Practices Related to NASA Nuclear Flight Safety for Space Flights Involving Space Nuclear Systems

The purpose of this handbook is to facilitate a repeatable and robust process that promotes clear and effective interfaces between activities and stakeholders focused on meeting nuclear flight safety requirements for missions utilizing space nuclear systems (SNS), within the context of NASA’s broader nuclear-related activities and interfaces. NPR 8715.26, Nuclear Flight Safety, requires that the NASA project manager “incorporate nuclear flight safety considerations starting with program or project formulation through the point at which the SNS or other radioactive material no longer has the potential to affect Earth’s biosphere.” NASA’s use of SNS inherently involves partnering with other stakeholders to conduct a range of related activities that interface with nuclear flight safety. From a categorical perspective these include: (i) meeting the authorities and licensing requirements for possession and use of nuclear material, as governed by other Federal authorities; (ii) conducting National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) activities for nuclear-enabled missions; (iii) meeting Federal nuclear launch authorization requirements; (iv) conducting radiological contingency planning activities, including those associated with international commitments; (v) performing risk communication and public outreach activities; and (vi) ensuring decommissioning and disposal strategies reflect National policies and interests. It is the intent of this handbook to promote an effective interface between nuclear flight safety and these interrelated categorical activities. In addition to activities undertaken with partnering agencies, there are individual nuclear-related activities and programs that have a nexus to nuclear flight safety, and these include: (i) applicable NASA Standing Review Boards; (ii) the US Department of Energy nuclear safety activities conducted in partnership with NASA under Memoranda of Understanding; (iii) the Department of Defense’s Range Safety activities; (iv) NASA’s general involvement in interagency and international dialogues regarding nuclear safety; (v) the NASA-administered Interagency Nuclear Safety Review Board; (vi) NASA’s program and project governance activities and nuclear-specific Technical Discipline Team activities under the Office of the Chief Engineer; and others. It is the intent of this handbook to promote effective leveraging of these additional interrelated organizational activities, as appropriate.

Donald Helton↗
DOE OSTI2023

A Data Processing Pipeline for Adversarial Socio-Technical Network Analysis

With the rapid adoption of emerging technologies, there is a need to catalog and model sociotechnical interdependencies that have been historically used to influence the operation of Critical Infrastructure networks including the impacts of mergers and acquisitions, hostile takeovers, and foreign investment. Our research intends to address this need with two primary contributions. First, we have developed a data curation and processing pipeline to generate sociotechnical networks extracted from a variety of data sources including SEC filings and infrastructure asset databases. The pipeline, implemented in Apache Airflow, extracts and normalizes the representation of entities and relations, specified within ontologies. Our intent is to provide an extensible, machine-actionable approach to quickly communicate such models, reproduce previous results, and adapt them to new, unanticipated situations. Second, networks produced by our pipeline enable the development of graph-theoretic metrics that consider the properties of network components in addition to its topology. Metadata associated with network components---whether semantic, temporal, or geospatial---affects the alignment of generated networks with assumptions underlying complexity metrics. Validation of generated networks relative to component types defined by an ontology, may allow the research community to adapt metrics to the semantics of the domains being studied. Generated networks may be processed as knowledge, dynamic, or spatial graphs and enables a variety of analyses including automated reasoning and measures of network complexity. Automated reasoning views extracted entities and relations as a knowledge graph; this enables application of inference rules that represent historically-attested adversarial business methods and applies that behavior to a specific geographic context. Measures of network complexity, including degree distribution, reachability analyses, temporal analysis, and community detection can be adapted to indicate adversarial organizational influence.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
NASA NTRS2021

Perceptions of Climate Risk and Use of Climate Risk Information by Natural Resource Conservation Stakeholders Participating in ADVANCE Projects in Asia and Latin America

Integrating climate risk information into resilience-building activities in the field is important to ensure that adaptation is based on the best available science. Despite this, many challenges exist when developing, communicating, and incorporating climate risk information. There are limited resources on how stakeholders perceive risks, use risk information, and what barriers exist to limit knowledge integration. This paper seeks to define the following: 1) What do conservation stakeholders consider to be the most significant climate risks they face now and possibly in the future? 2) What have been the most significant barriers to their using climate risk information? 3) What sources and types of knowledge would be most useful for these managers to overcome these barriers? A survey was conducted among stakeholders (n = 224) associated with World Wildlife Fund projects in tropical and subtropical countries. A very high proportion of stakeholders used climate risk information and yet faced integration-related challenges, which included too much uncertainty and the lack of a relevant scale for planning. The main factors preventing the use of climate risk information in decision-making were unavailability of climate risk information, no or limited financial or human resources available to respond, lack of organizational mandate or support, and no or limited institutional incentives. Comparing perceived current and future risks revealed a decline in concern for some future climate hazards. Survey respondents identified scientific reports, climate scientists, and online sources as the most useful information sources of climate risk information, while (i) maps and illustrations; (ii) scenarios format; and (iii) data tables, graphs, and charts were identified as user-friendly formats.

Climate risk↗
DOE OSTI2023

Transforming our understanding of chloroplast-associated genes through comprehensive characterization of protein localizations and protein-protein interactions

Bioenergy crops are a renewable source of fuels and are a critical base for building a carbon-neutral economy. Rational engineering of bioenergy crops has the potential to enhance the yields. However, our ability to engineer plants is limited because the functions of most genes remain unknown. Systematic characterization of gene function in plants thus has the potential to greatly accelerate bioenergy research. Here, we focus on the chloroplast, an underexplored energy-producing organelle that is a hallmark of plants. The chloroplast is one of the promising targets of biofuel crop engineering efforts because of its central role in photosynthesis, metabolism, and intracellular signaling. However, the protein composition of the chloroplast and the functions of most of its proteins remain poorly characterized. At the core of this project, we sought to comprehensively determine the localization of chloroplast-associated proteins and generate a spatially defined protein-protein interaction network for chloroplast. For this purpose, we used the leading model alga Chlamydomonas reinhardtii, which greatly increased experimental speed and throughput. We illustrated the value of our findings to land plants by determining the localization of Arabidopsis thaliana land plant homologs of the Chlamydomonas proteins. Altogether, we were successful in determining the localization of 1,034 chloroplast-associated proteins in Chlamydomonas. The localizations provide numerous insights into the spatial organization of chloroplasts and how they function to support photosynthesis. The localization patterns of distinct proteins revealed new chloroplast structures and revealed new spatial organization inside the chloroplast. We also identified new components of known chloroplast structures, such as the chloroplast envelope, nucleoid, plastoglobuli, and pyrenoid. We identified these new components by investigating the interacting partners of known proteins. Many proteins localized in both the chloroplast and other cellular structures, thereby hinting at new functions and communication between cellular structures. We also applied machine learning on the atlas to generate predictions for the location of all of the proteins in Chlamydomonas. This enabled us to assign putative functions to many uncharacterized proteins based on their cellular location. Altogether, this research establishes a rich resource that opens new avenues of investigation and guides future work in deciphering and manipulating chloroplast function. Next, we developed an extensive protein-protein interaction network for the chloroplast by performing affinity purification-mass spectrometry on ~1,150 tagged chloroplast-associated proteins, the first such large-scale study in any photosynthetic organism. This dataset reveals 4,694 high-confidence protein-protein interactions, offering insights into the functions of thousands of conserved poorly-characterized chloroplast proteins. This systematic identification of protein-protein interactions in the chloroplast also provides multiple exciting new research directions and a detailed blueprint of the chloroplast's operation. This research lays the groundwork to decipher the inner workings of the chloroplast, the cell structure at the heart of photosynthesis. The spatial atlas and protein-protein interactions reveal chloroplast organizational features that would not have been accessible with traditional approaches. The localization mapping, insights into the function, and research materials generated further provide a rich resource for the research community to advance the understanding of how the chloroplast is organized to enable engineering of enhanced photosynthetic organisms.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The Interplay of Humor and Team Cohesion Over Time

Team bonding and interpersonal relationships are increasingly important as we continue understanding the effects of the pandemic on team dynamics. Specifically, team cohesion, defined as having a sense of belonging and commitment towards the group, has been found to be important for key team outcomes such as performance, relationships, and productivity (Beal, Cohen, Burke, & McLendon, 2003; Bell & Marentette, 2011). Research has stressed the benefits of positive humor on cohesion, with humor creating positive emotions and decreasing social distance (e.g., Robert & Wilbanks, 2012; Robinson & Smith-Lovin, 2001; Romero & Pescosolido, 2008). However, research around the impact of negative humor on cohesion is scarce. This study aims to examine the impact of both positive and negative humor on cohesion for teams over time. The longitudinal design allows us to examine the interplay of humor and cohesion throughout a team’s lifecycle to guide relationship development and management (Romero & Pescosolido, 2008). Humor is defined as remarks recognized as amusing or funny (Martin, 2007). Positive humor can be categorized as good-natured aimed to create mutual agreement, while negative humor is defined as aggressive, hostile, and unreciprocated (Coan & Gottman, 2007). Research has concluded the many benefits of positive humor, showing it can increase open communication, social support, and create a pleasant environment (Martineau, 1972; Robinson & Smith-Lovin, 2001; Romero & Pescosolido, 2008). The Humor Wheel model suggests that positive humor is contagious due to the positive affect produced and mimicked (Lehmann-Willenbrock & Allen 2014). Research has suggested positive humor would increase over time based on the norm of reciprocity; those treated positively are likely to respond similarly (Gouldner, 1960). Multiple parties’ involvement in humor exchanges highlights the interpersonal nature of humor. Thus, long-term consequences on relationships should be considered, such as cohesion (Robert & Wilbanks, 2012). It would be instrumental to understand how humor interactions could weaken or strengthen group cohesion through relational and emotional bonds over time (Martineau, 1972; Romero & Pescosolido, 2008). Positive humor should fundamentally increase team cohesion (Mesmer-Magnus, Glew, & Viswesvaran, 2012; Walter & Baruch, 2008) by promoting group harmony, team member attractiveness, and ingroup identity (Holmes, 2006). Thus, it is expected there is a positive relationship between positive humor and team cohesion over time (hypothesis 1). Humor is not always beneficial, especially when it elicits negative emotions (Dikkers, Doosje, & de Lange, 2011). Negative humor can be used to humiliate, tease, or insult (Coan & Gottman, 2007; Collinson, 1988; Romero & Cruthirds, 2006). It tends to cause distress and damage relationships, and in turn, decrease organizational performance and production (Avolio, Howell, & Sosik, 1999; Janes & Olson, 2000; Yerkes, 2001). Research concludes negative humor may create subgroups and decrease cooperation (Romero & Arendt, 2011). Research has also indicated positive implications for negative humor under specific circumstances. Negative humor could help to solidify ingroup identity and strengthen bonds when directed outside the team (Terrion & Ashforth, 2002; Thomae & Pina, 2015). For example, sport teams may use negative humor towards their opponent before a game, which emphasizes their differences and lowers the status and power of their opponent, ultimately promoting solidarity and cohesion inside the group. For this study, it is anticipated that negative humor toward other teammates will decrease team cohesion over time due to the damage to relationships and negative affect produced (Duncan, Smeltzer, & Leap, 1990; Maples, Dupey, Torres‐Rivera, Phan, Vereen, & Garrett, 2001). We also predicted that negative humor focused on something or someone outside the team will increase cohesion by enhancing ingroup ties and creating a common identity (Thomae & Pina, 2015). Thus, the relationship between negative humor and cohesion will be moderated by the target of the humor. The relationship will be negative when the target is within the team and positive when the target is outside (hypothesis 2).

Melissa M. Vazquez↗
NASA NTRS2023

State-of-the-Art: Small Spacecraft Technology

When the first edition of NASA’s Small Spacecraft Technology State-of-the-art report was published in 2013, 247 CubeSats and 105 other non-CubeSat small spacecraft under 50 kilograms (kg) had been launched worldwide, representing less than 2% of launched mass into orbit over multiple years. In 2013 alone, around 60% of the total spacecraft launched had a mass under 600 kg, and of those under 600 kg, 83% were under 200 kg and 37% were nanosatellites (1). Of the total 1,849 spacecraft launched in 2021, 94% were small spacecraft with an overall mass under 600 kg, and of those under 600 kg, 40% were under 200 kg, and 11% were nanosatellites (1). Since 2013, the fight heritage for small spacecraft has increased by over 30% and has become the primary source to space access for commercial, government, private, and academic institutions. The total number of spacecraft launched in the past 10 years is 5,681 and 45% of those had a mass. As with all previous editions of this report, the 2022 edition captures and distills a wealth of new information available on small spacecraft systems from NASA and other publicly available sources. This report is limited to publicly available information and cannot reflect major advances in development that are not publicly disclosed. We encourage any opportunity to publish mission outcomes and technology development milestones (e.g., via conference papers, press releases, company website) so they can be reflected in this report. Overall, this report is a survey of small spacecraft technologies sourced from open literature; it does not endeavor to be an original source, and only considers literature in the public domain to identify and classify devices. Commonly used sources for data include manufacturer datasheets, press releases, conference papers, journal papers, public filings with government agencies, news articles, presentations, the compendium of databases accessed via NASA’s Small Spacecraft Systems Virtual Institute (S3VI) Information Search, and engagement with companies. Data not appropriate for public dissemination, such as proprietary, export controlled, or otherwise restricted data, are not considered. As a result, this report includes many dedicated hours of desk research performed by subject matter experts reviewing resources noted above. Content in this 2022 edition is based on data available by October 2022. This report should not be considered as a comprehensive overview of all the technologies but a great reference for the current state-of-the-art SmallSat technologies. The organizational approach for each chapter is relatively consistent with previous editions and includes an introduction of the technology, current development status of the technology’s procurable systems, and summary tables of technologies surveyed. The content in each chapter is uniquely organized to present a mini-stand-alone report on spacecraft subsystems. As in previous years, chapters include information from previous editions but are updated with new and maturating technologies and reference missions. Tables in each section provide a convenient summary of the technologies discussed, with explanations and references in the body text. The authors have attempted to isolate trends in the small spacecraft industry to point out which technologies have been adopted after successful demonstration missions. Lastly, the authors tried to use the terms “SmallSat,” “microsatellite,” “nanosatellite,” and “CubeSat” in a consistent manner, even as these terms are often used interchangeably in the space industry. Every subsystem chapter contains updated information to reflect the growth in the small spacecraft market. Significant changes are included in several chapters. The “Complete Spacecraft Platforms” chapter now includes information on the two main market options, hosted payload services and dedicated buses. The “Power” chapter provides information on the development of solid-state batteries with significantly higher energy than the current state-of-theart lithium-ion batteries. A large effort was made to update the “Communications” chapter to appropriately capture the recent technology maturation of optical communications for SmallSats. The “Ground Data Systems and Mission Operations” chapter was updated to reflect the recent establishment of the Near Space Network and influx of SmallSat Optical Ground Stations. The “Guidance, Navigation and Control” chapter was updated to include Lidar sensor technology. The “Deorbit Systems” chapter includes a discussion of recently proposed changes by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to limit a spacecraft’s lifetime to no longer than 5 years after end-of-mission. The “Identification and Tracking” Chapter includes updated information on the progress of SmallSat tracking. Finally, this report now encompasses technology funded by NASA’s Small Spacecraft Technology (SST) program’s SmallSat Technology Partnerships (STP) initiative which is described further in this Introduction. The reader can find the included SST technology in the “On the Horizon” section of the “Thermal Systems”, “Communications”, and “Guidance, Navigation, and Control” chapters. A central element of this report is to list state-of-the-art technologies by NASA standard Technology Readiness Level (TRL) as defined by the 2020 NASA Engineering Handbook, found in NASA NPR 7123.1C NASA Systems Engineering Processes and Requirements. The authors have endeavored to independently verify the TRL value of each technology by reviewing and citing published test results or publicly available data to the best of their ability. Where test results and data disagree with vendors’ own advertised TRL, the authors have attempted to engage the vendors to discuss the discrepancy. Readers are strongly encouraged to follow the references cited in the literature describing the full performance range and capabilities of each technology. Readers of this report should reach out to individual companies to further clarify information. It is important to note that this report takes a broad system-level view. To attain a high TRL, the subsystem must be in a flight-ready configuration with all supporting infrastructure—such as mounting points, power conversion, and control algorithms—in an integrated unit. An accurate TRL assessment requires a high degree of technical knowledge on a subject device, and an in-depth understanding of the mission (including interfaces and environment) on which the device was flown. There is variability in TRL values depending on design factors for a specific technology. For example, differences in TRL assessment based on the operating environment may result from the thermal environment, mechanical loads, mission duration, or radiation exposure. If a technology has flown on a mission without success, or without providing valid confirmation to the operator, such claimed “flight heritage” was discounted. The authors believe TRLs are most accurately determined when assessed within the context of a program’s unique requirements. While the overall capability of small spacecraft has matured since the 2021 edition of this report, technologies are still being developed to make deep space SmallSat missions more routine and more cost effective. Future editions of this report may include content dedicated to the rapidly growing fields of assembly, integration, and testing services, and mission modeling and simulation–all of which are now extensively represented at small spacecraft conferences. Many of these subsystems and services are still in their infancy, but as they evolve and reliable conventions and standards emerge, the next iteration of this report may also evolve to include additional chapters.

Bruce Yost↗
NASA NTRS2005

The Case of Ozone Depletion

While the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is widely perceived as a space agency, since its inception NASA has had a mission dedicated to the home planet. Initially, this mission involved using space to better observe and predict weather and to enable worldwide communication. Meteorological and communication satellites showed the value of space for earthly endeavors in the 1960s. In 1972, NASA launched Landsat, and the era of earth-resource monitoring began. At the same time, in the late 1960s and early 1970s, the environmental movement swept throughout the United States and most industrialized countries. The first Earth Day event took place in 1970, and the government generally began to pay much more attention to issues of environmental quality. Mitigating pollution became an overriding objective for many agencies. NASA's existing mission to observe planet Earth was augmented in these years and directed more toward environmental quality. In the 1980s, NASA sought to plan and establish a new environmental effort that eventuated in the 1990s with the Earth Observing System (EOS). The Agency was able to make its initial mark via atmospheric monitoring, specifically ozone depletion. An important policy stimulus in many respects, ozone depletion spawned the Montreal Protocol of 1987 (the most significant international environmental treaty then in existence). It also was an issue critical to NASA's history that served as a bridge linking NASA's weather and land-resource satellites to NASA s concern for the global changes affecting the home planet. Significantly, as a global environmental problem, ozone depletion underscored the importance of NASA's ability to observe Earth from space. Moreover, the NASA management team's ability to apply large-scale research efforts and mobilize the talents of other agencies and the private sector illuminated its role as a lead agency capable of crossing organizational boundaries as well as the science-policy divide.

Lambright, W. Henry↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The System Modeling and Analysis of Resiliency in STEReO (SMARt-STEReO)

Wildfire emergency response has remained rooted in relatively low-tech solutions for coordination between ground and aerial assets. These low-tech solutions are robust for the remote environments in which wildfires are usually fought, but limit strategic cross-organizational support and the ability to deploy and effectively utilize aerial assets. As aircraft become more advanced and new technology, including drones, become available to firefighters, a new, more modern method of asset coordination is needed. NASA is working on a project called ‘Scalable Traffic Management for Emergency Response Operations’ (STEReO) to integrate unmanned aerial systems (UAS)and UAS traffic management (UTM)into wildfire response. STEReO’s goals include simplifying the coordination of aerial assets, improving the existing UAS framework, and increasing the role of additional autonomous systems to reduce human risk and to increase system resilience. This paper describes the development of the ‘System Modeling and Analysis of Resiliency in STEReO’ (SMARt-STEReO) project, which aims to model wildfire response and to quantify the additional system resilience that STEReO technology provides firefighters. This paper verifies SMARt-STEReO and defines its scope; it includes experimental and statistical analysis of the impact that the addition of UAS has on both performance metrics and also on performance resiliency response to a given fault. SMARt-STEReO is a grid-based model of fire propagation that incorporates varying crew responses. Through the use of a Python package called ‘fmdtools’, the model easily allows for the addition of faults to the system. These faults allow analysts to investigate various response parameters. Factors including terrain, fuel type and wind speed can be modified to affect the fire propagation; additionally, the number of ground crews, engines, fixed wing aircraft, helicopters, and UAS can be changed to affect the crew response. The communication lines between actors mimic those used in real life situations. This paper explains the development of SMARt-STEReO including background research, verification and validation, and preliminary experimental analysis of system resilience to both a minor and major fault in systems with and without UAS.

Resiliency↗
NASA NTRS2000

Integration of multiple research disciplines on the International Space Station

The International Space Station will provide an extremely high-quality, long-duration microgravity environment for the conduct of research. In addition, the ISS offers a platform for performing observations of Earth and Space from a high-inclination orbit, outside of the Earth's atmosphere. This unique environment and observational capability offers the opportunity for advancement in a diverse set of research fields. Many of these disciplines do not relate to one another, and present widely differing approaches to study, as well as different resource and operational requirements. Significant challenges exist to ensure the highest quality research return for each investigation. Requirements from different investigations must be identified, clarified, integrated and communicated to ISS personnel in a consistent manner. Resources such as power, crew time, etc. must be apportioned to allow the conduct of each investigation. Decisions affecting research must be made at the strategic level as well as at a very detailed execution level. The timing of the decisions can range from years before an investigation to real-time operations. The international nature of the Space Station program adds to the complexity. Each participating country must be assured that their interests are represented during the entire planning and operations process. A process for making decisions regarding research planning, operations, and real-time replanning is discussed. This process ensures adequate representation of all research investigators. It provides a means for timely decisions, and it includes a means to ensure that all ISS International Partners have their programmatic interests represented. c 2000 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Research/organization & administration↗
NASA NTRS2004

A Multiagent Modeling Environment for Simulating Work Practice in Organizations

In this paper we position Brahms as a tool for simulating organizational processes. Brahms is a modeling and simulation environment for analyzing human work practice, and for using such models to develop intelligent software agents to support the work practice in organizations. Brahms is the result of more than ten years of research at the Institute for Research on Learning (IRL), NYNEX Science & Technology (the former R&D institute of the Baby Bell telephone company in New York, now Verizon), and for the last six years at NASA Ames Research Center, in the Work Systems Design and Evaluation group, part of the Computational Sciences Division (Code IC). Brahms has been used on more than ten modeling and simulation research projects, and recently has been used as a distributed multiagent development environment for developing work practice support tools for human in-situ science exploration on planetary surfaces, in particular a human mission to Mars. Brahms was originally conceived of as a business process modeling and simulation tool that incorporates the social systems of work, by illuminating how formal process flow descriptions relate to people s actual located activities in the workplace. Our research started in the early nineties as a reaction to experiences with work process modeling and simulation . Although an effective tool for convincing management of the potential cost-savings of the newly designed work processes, the modeling and simulation environment was only able to describe work as a normative workflow. However, the social systems, uncovered in work practices studied by the design team played a significant role in how work actually got done-actual lived work. Multi- tasking, informal assistance and circumstantial work interactions could not easily be represented in a tool with a strict workflow modeling paradigm. In response, we began to develop a tool that would have the benefits of work process modeling and simulation, but be distinctively able to represent the relations of people, locations, systems, artifacts, communication and information content.

Sierhuis, Maarten↗
DOE OSTI2023

University Coalition for Fossil Fuel Energy Research

Following a nationwide open competition, the University Coalition for Fossil Energy Research (UCFER) was established in October 2015 through a cooperative agreement between Penn State and the Department of Energy (DOE) National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL). Penn State lead UCFER with the objective of advancing basic and applied research for clean and low-carbon energy based on fossil fuels in support of the DOE’s mission. UCFER focused on research that improves the efficiency of production and use of fossil energy resources, while minimizing the environmental impacts and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Penn State lead a team of nine universities (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, The Pennsylvania State University, Princeton University, Texas A&M University, University of Kentucky, University of Southern California, The University of Tulsa, University of Wyoming, and Virginia Polytechnic and State University) during the competition stage, adding seven more universities in 2017 (Carnegie Mellon University, Louisiana State University, The Ohio State University, University of North Dakota, University of Pittsburgh, University of Utah, and West Virginia University). This Coalition exhibited a wide geographical distribution across the U.S. bringing a wide variety of fossil energy expertise. This national university alliance was a major collaborative effort with NETL to address specific topics of R&D in NETL’s mission area, which involved one or more of NETL’s five core competencies (Geologic and Environmental Systems, Materials Engineering and Manufacturing, Energy Conversion Engineering, Systems Engineering and Analysis, and Computational Science and Engineering). The first five to six months of the project was the definitization stage. During this period, Penn State worked closely with NETL to finalize the Coalition organizational structure and By- Laws, prepare a statement of substantial involvement and a statement of project objectives, and develop operations and membership plans. A major component of this stage included preparing an execution plan to solicit research, evaluate proposals, recommend selected projects to NETL, and award projects. In addition, a plan was prepared to monitor projects, review projects, disseminate knowledge from research projects and develop an online system for Coalition research portfolio management. This included developing a website and several databases. The first of six rounds of solicitations started in mid-2016. Projects from the sixth solicitation started February 1, 2021, and ended January 31, 2023. Projects that were selected represented twelve technology lines. Approximately $16.6 million in funding was available for the six solicitations. Most of the funding was provided by DOE, Office of Fossil Energy (DOEFE) with the DOE Fuel Cells Technologies Office (DOE-FCTO) providing funding for a few projects. Coalition universities submitted 259 proposals in response to the solicitations, requesting approximately $67.0 million in funding, and forty-three projects were selected. However, one project withdrew after the principal investigator left the university. The management of the Coalition projects was a major activity by Penn State. Managing the Coalition projects consisted of monitoring the projects, reviewing the projects through annual technical review meetings, disseminating knowledge from the research projects, and developing an online system for Coalition research portfolio management. Penn State’s OMT monitored projects to ensure that all milestones (technical, schedule, budget) were met, expenditures were allowable, cost share (when applicable) were reported, and all technical reports were submitted. The OMT also posted the technical reports electronically on a secure members-only website for access and review by the Coalition members. Disseminating knowledge from the research projects was done through a website, newsletters, various meetings, conferences, journal articles, publicity/press releases, and project summaries that were prepared after each project was completed. Penn State kept NETL apprised of UCFER progress through quarterly reports (thirtyone were submitted by Penn State), verbal and written communications, yearly updates at the annual technical review meetings, and cost accrual reports. The UCFER project had a significant impacty. The UCFER program established the first national university alliance in fossil energy research with a major collaboration effort with DOE NETL that addressed specific topics in NETL’s research and development mission areas. It generated inter-university collaborations, which was another program interest. Twenty-two out of 259 proposals contained collaborations (≈8.5%) and three of forty-two funded projects involved inter-university collaborations (≈7.0%). The forty-two funded projects provided support at fourteen universities involving 269 personnel. Research was conducted by 106 faculty, 115 graduate and undergraduate students, forty-six research staff and post-doctoral scholars, and two visiting scholars. Students and post-doctoral scholars were also on-site at NETL through CRADAs. In addition, non-Coalition participants included six universities and sixteen companies and national laboratories. The non-Coalition participants were involved as subcontractors, providers of cost share, performed unpaid consultation and sample analysis, served as advisory board members, or were providers of samples and materials for testing. UCFER also produced visibility in that fifty-six refereed journal articles were published, fifty-seven conference papers and twenty-three posters were prepared, 190 presentations were given, eight patent applications were filed, two books/book chapters were written, and ten software codes were developed. Collaboration between NETL and the individual projects was a major requirement for all funded projects. This included NETL staff time to support collaboration, consultation, technical guidance, sample preparation and analysis, internships at NETL, on-site testing and equipment usage by Coalition participants at NETL, co-mentoring students, and coauthoring journal articles and conference papers. Collaboration was impacted by COVID-19 in that not all on-site activities could be performed. NETL personnel were coauthors on eight of the conference papers (fourteen percent of the conference papers that were prepared) and seventeen of the journal articles (thirty percent of the journal articles that were prepared). A website was developed for an online proposal solicitation and review process and to provide exposure to UCFER. A website analysis highlighted the large amount of member and general public interest in UCFER by interpreting access statistics from March 2016 through June 2023. Visitors to the site originated from many different organizations, businesses, and countries. The website provided a means to disseminate information to both the general public and the UCFER members and was successfully used for outreach activities. In addition, NETL required that RFP release, proposal submission, and proposal reviews all be performed online. Penn State successfully developed these capabilities in a secure section of the website, which were used throughout the UCFER project. It is recognized that each project had its technical successes. In addition, highlighted successes were compiled and summarized from the research projects. Information was requested from the PIs of completed projects. In addition, Penn State’s Operations Management Team reviewed subcontract reports to identify project successes. Examples of information requested from PIs included (not all-inclusive): new projects that have been funded as a result of UCFER funding; new commercial products; establishment of a new center; new patent; new software; best paper awards; highly-cited work; and graduate student successes. A total of forty-eight highlighted successes were reported.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Model-Based Systems Engineering Journey to Developing a Concept of Operations

Starting in 2017, NASA’s Human Research Program (HRP) Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) element began a systems engineering transition from traditional, document-centric development to model-centric development when defining its foundation medical systems. These foundation medical systems define a Concept of Operations (ConOps) and identify the generic requirements for a medical system based on assumptions about a generic crew and mission environments and guidance from NASA standards (e.g., Medical “Levels of Care”). By making the transition, ExMC intends to improve communication among stakeholders about foundation medical system requirements and content. In addition, this transition will enable ExMC to lower both development and crew treatment risks for future, mission-specific medical systems. ExMC followed a Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) paradigm when developing the foundation medical systems. A model-based approach provides several advantages over a traditional, document-centric approach. First, when Systems Engineers (SE) develop diagrams in a model using a standard modeling language, they produce information dense pictures that facilitate understanding much more efficiently with less room for misinterpretation than text. Second, due to the evolving nature of projects, documentation becomes out of date the minute it is published. This can result in people making decisions based on information that is no longer current, especially if they are referencing a locally-stored copy of a document. A model, on the other hand, is always up to date with the latest approved changes and information. It serves as a single point of truth. Third, a model-centric approach centralizes all important information in one place. Rather than having to flip through separate ConOps documents, design specifications, requirements specifications, and the like to coordinate information, a model captures the content in one, integrated spot. This integration makes tracing information from end-to-end easier with greater reliability. The ExMC Systems Engineering Lifecycle follows a well-defined process. ExMC Systems Engineers perform all major steps of the process, regardless of the development methodology. One of the first steps in the process is developing the ConOps that describes the operation of the system from the point of view of the users. It includes a list of the users and their needs, the goals of the medical system, key assumptions about the system, and definitions of the medical system’s operational environments. For this development effort, ExMC chose to replace the traditional text-based ConOps document with a model. While the decision to change the development workflow was not difficult, implementing the structural and organizational workflows were. It required showing ExMC’s users, most of whom are not Systems Engineers, how the information they require would be presented in the model and to gain their acceptance of this approach. This paper documents key lessons learned during the ConOps transformation by focusing on how the model represents information, the agile workflow used by SEs when developing the model and how it integrates into a project plan, how leadership influenced key users to accept the transformation, and how the users interact with the model information.

Jeffrey Robert Cohen↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Crew Performance Support System to Aid in Anomaly Resolution: Concept of Operations

As missions progress into deep space, communication delays and disruptions will disenable the crew’s reliance on Earth experts. There are also limitations in the amount of data that can be downlinked to the ground. It is prudent to assume that critical, complex vehicle or habitat sub-systems will malfunction at a time when a lunar or Mars’ crew cannot rely on the Earth-Support team to detect, diagnose and resolve the problem and it is impractical to expect a small crew to step-in with the same level of expertise as 50+ authorities. The crew will need novel processes and advanced technological support to independently identify and resolve safety- and time-critical anomalies. That a self-reliant crew is unable to respond appropriately to time-critical anomalies is a significant risk to crew safety and mission success. This risk is driven by several factors; novel and unanticipated anomalies would not have been trained pre-flight, the crew could forget their pre-flight training or spaceflight stressors could impair the crew’s problem-solving ability. At last year’s IWS, Beard reported that a single spaceflight stressor (elevated CO2) could undermine the crew’s ability to independently respond to emergencies. Concept of Operations (ConOps) provide a common view of future system functions to all stakeholders. For the current project, a ConOps was developed that describes the operational processes, practices and capabilities needed by a crew of astronauts on deep space missions to autonomously respond to anticipated and unanticipated anomalies. It is crucial to recognize that, as of August 2018 existing technologies are unable to effectively support crew anomaly response to unanticipated events. “Intelligent technology” has not reached a maturity level that permits generalizing a solution to novel situations. For example, to train intelligent technology requires volumes of data that do not exist. The complexities involved in a manned mission to Mars cannot be compared to sending rovers to Mars using scripted software. This ConOps proposes a Crew Performance Support System (CPSS) that will push NASA and its industry partners toward what will be required for a safe and successful manned mission to Mars. Anomaly resolution during a deep space mission will take place within a dynamic, or changing, context. The figure to the left shows five broad contextual variables: the organizational culture, mission context, system characteristics, team characteristics and individual characteristics. The yellow arrow indicates that spaceflight and task-related stressors can affect system, team and individual crewmember characteristics and therefore anomaly response potential. The figure depicts a protective umbrella of Human-System Integration (HSI) principles that should be instituted during CPSS development including a balanced workload, shared situation awareness and building an appropriate level of trust in the automation. The figure also depicts two interrelated and cooperative components, an HSI Data System and other Enabling Capabilities will be required to support crew anomaly response and Earth-Support situation awareness. As we journey from ISS to Gateway to Mars, multiple, simultaneous and integrated research and development efforts (i.e., support systems co-evolution) must be implemented to meet the problem-solving challenges a self-reliant crew will face on a Mars’ mission. The crossovers between the capabilities are just as important as the discrete capabilities themselves. As the capabilities mature, the lines between the support subdomains will blur and an integrated system will emerge. The ConOps summarizes current knowledge about how highly trained people solve anomalies in safety- and time-critical situations, describes a group of capabilities that could help to reduce the extant risk and documents requirements levied on additional systems that provides critical inputs to the CPSS. Scenarios are used to promote a shared understanding of processes, practices and technological goals needed for safe and productive manned missions beyond LEO.

HSIA risk↗